FlyerTalk Forums - Voting Ended - Motion Passed: Add a Minor Amendment process

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)

- TalkBoard Topics (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkboard-topics-382/)

- - Voting Ended - Motion Passed: Add a Minor Amendment process (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/talkboard-topics/1683275-voting-ended-motion-passed-add-minor-amendment-process.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by rwoman (Post 24935294)

Nor have I as I just came off LHR-LAX-LHR (food poisoning) HEL-BKK-CDG-FCO-OSL-LHR last week (a week of work) and LHR-SVG-LHR yesterday.

Wanted to read through things on a regular screen vice just my phone before voting.

Hope you are feeling better!

Quote:

Originally Posted by kipper (Post 24935485)

Hope you are feeling better!

Yes, thankfully, I have a fairly stable system. :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by rwoman (Post 24935339)

Having sifted through the thread again, I've voted, "No" even though the motion has passed and I'm in the minority.

We all make mistakes and common sense should persist, but I believe in doing our best collectively to get it right in the first place.

Not that it really matters at this point; but I agree with rwoman and voted “no” as well — especially as I was the person who apparently caused the most recent kerfuffle in the first place with the motion for a vote...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Motion

Moved by nsx and seconded by MSPeconomist:

The TalkBoard Guidelines shall be revised as follows:

Add item 4.B.v.
v. Any TalkBoard member may propose a minor amendment to a motion by posting the text in the voting thread in the private TalkBoard forum and in the public TalkBoard Topics forum more than 48 hours from the vote closing time and before enough yes or no votes have been cast to assure passage or failure of the motion. If the originator of a motion, the seconder, and all Yes voters as of the time the amendment was proposed post in the voting thread their agreement that the amendment is both minor and desirable, and if this occurs at least 48 hours from the vote closing time, the TalkBoard President shall revise the motion and ensure that public notices of the motion are also updated. For the purpose of this paragraph, a minor amendment is a change which does not alter the overall intent of the motion nor raise any new issues for consideration which would otherwise warrant the submission of a new motion.

Modify item 4.C.v.
v. Once a TalkBoard member registers a selection that selection is final, except that a member voting No or Abstain may change that vote within 48 hours after a motion has been modified by minor amendment. The TalkBoard President shall manually adjust the original vote count as necessary. If the possibility of changed votes exists due to a proposed minor amendment, the TalkBoard President shall decide whether to defer public announcement of a "shall not pass" outcome.

Add item 4.D.v. and move current item 4.D.v. to become 4.D.vi.
v. When a minor amendment is approved, the TalkBoard President shall instruct the TalkBoard Vice President/Secretary to post the text of the change and a list of the approving TalkBoard members in the public TalkBoard Topics thread announcing the vote.

vi. Once voting is completed and the TalkBoard President has formally announced the results of the vote in the TalkBoard forum the Vice President/Secretary shall announce the full results of the roll call vote in
a. the public TalkBoard Topics thread announcing the vote
b. a new thread in the Town Hall forum.

On June 8, 2015 TalkBoard succeeded to pass 6-3-0:
"Add a Minor Amendment process"

Voting Yes: bdschobel, CMK10, jason8612, kokonutz, MSPeconomist, nsx
Voting No: Canarsie, dchristiva, rwoman

Quote:

Originally Posted by rwoman (Post 24935339)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Canarsie (Post 24936112)

Thank you both ^

I waited until everyone voted before replying to some of the comments, but here goes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by tcook052 (Post 24882130)

If the intent is to catch small oversights I don't see this as really necessary given the recently adopted waiting period between site-wide announcement and the opening of TB voting on motions may itself prove helpful in catching minor errors that can be corrected before voting begins.

I didn't see it as necessary, either, but some people did, and having a written procedure for fixing minor problems can't do any harm.

Quote:

Originally Posted by goalie (Post 24882215)

I still say no to this as TB should take the time, listen to the comments and get the motion right the first time but if something is missed (other than a simple typo), withdraw the motion or have TB members simply vote no to kill the motion and re-do the motion to get it right

This "get it right the first time" mantra is silly. Everyone tries to get it right the first time. That's a given. But when it isn't right, we should be able to fix it without starting all over again. That's a waste of everybody's time. Why would anyone be in favor of doing that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doc Savage (Post 24885690)

Agree. The route proposed in the motion is too circuitous. Any motion in its final form should be subjected to a de novo up or down vote.

I see no purpose whatsoever in forcing people to vote on a motion that has been recognized as flawed. The earlier votes would be wrong in many cases, and the overall vote tally would be meaningless. Furthermore, we would run the risk of actually passing a flawed motion. This is a very bad idea.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Markie (Post 24891113)

I still wonder how TB has time to worry about this stuff. Get it right first time or kill it - that's the best 'Minor Amendment Process' ever.

We have to make time for "this stuff." I think it's superfluous, but now it's done, so we don't need to worry about how to handle minor problems in the future.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkiAdcock (Post 24907051)

Typos don't need a minor amendment process unless TB has totally jumped the shark. No need to apologize for a typo unless it significantly changes a motion. Just say oops, sorry, fix it, & move on.

That's my view, too, but some people obviously disagree -- strenuously, in a few cases.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Canarsie (Post 24908136)

When arriving at decisions as a moderator, I usually defer to what FlyerTalk members think, as FlyerTalk members are typically quite sharp at deciphering and understanding situations. That has worked remarkably well for me in the past.

I personally see things similarly with decisions to be recommended by members of TalkBoard — especially as our top priority is to represent what FlyerTalk members want...

...so I agree with you — although I do not look like Fonzie on a surfboard in Hawaii...

If all that we did was reflect "what FlyerTalk members want," then we wouldn't need TalkBoard at all. A polling process would be sufficient. I didn't run for TalkBoard to put my judgment to sleep.

Moreover, we never really know "what members think"; we know what just a few especially vocal members think. Maybe everyone else agrees with them, but maybe not. That's where our judgment comes into play.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Markie (Post 24910689)

Unfortunately we won't agree that you have the power to make minor amendments to motions. It's a fundamental difference we have debated in other threads. Without a specific power for this, the changes are ultra vires in my view.

Feel free to change the Guidelines and the problem goes away!

And that's just what we did.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kokonutz (Post 24925006)

Fonzie was on water skis and was in LA. @:-)

I voted for this motion because I'd rather have minor changes done by a set of rules rather than by Presidential fiat.

I'm happy either way. I just want some mechanism to fix minor, obvious errors, like we did recently.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Canarsie (Post 24925207)

The president of TalkBoard gets his own car?!? I am going to have to run for office next year...

It's a very small car! :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by kipper (Post 24932235)

I'm not either. It seems that there's less listening to what members want and more doing whatever they want.

This is a silly accusation, but you are entitled to your opinion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rwoman (Post 24935339)

See comment above about the "get it right the first time" mantra.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Canarsie (Post 24936112)

Huh? We fixed your typo by presidential fiat (to quote kokonutz). This new process is better than that, right? But you voted no? I have no idea why you voted the way you did. Really. If you think you explained it, then your explanation went right over my head.

Bruce

Quote:

Originally Posted by bdschobel (Post 24937080)

The typographical error was fixed without a minor amendment process; and the motion successfully transitioned into a vote.

You actually explained my reasoning better than I could attempt...

...but I expect no less from someone who drives around in a free Fiat...

I asked for a Lamborghini! :(

Bruce

Quote:

Originally Posted by goalie (Post 24936972)

Thank you both ^

I agree--thank you both, and thank you dchristiva!

Quote:

Originally Posted by kipper (Post 24939866)

I agree--thank you both, and thank you dchristiva!

And my additional thanks as well ^

Quote:

Originally Posted by kipper (Post 24939866)

I agree--thank you both, and thank you dchristiva!

Quote:

Originally Posted by goalie (Post 24940099)

And my additional thanks as well ^

No thanks necessary. After reviewing further feedback and considering the motion more, I just couldn't get my arms around what I felt was too much latitude. But, clearly others saw it differently, so we move forward together.